On 18/06/06, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To be concrete: If people are able to retrieve this informtation for
tagging purposes, and if ARs are displayed in a more practical way,
THEN, there will be no need anymore to give the same track title to all
versions of the same song, because people can just follow some ARs that
point them to the track with the 'original title'. Whatever the 'original
title' is and how the ARs work, will have to be worked out.
In conclusion I propose to postpone this debate until Picard 0.8 comes
out. I then propose not to lead a debate about principles, but a debate
about concete solutions to this and the related problems using contextual
track titles (that say "(album version)" if it makes sense _in context_),
ARs (taht point to the same track with the most 'context free' title), and
Picard 0.8s tagger script that retrieves all this info and uses it for
tagging.
i'm not sure i'm reading this right, but surely this is the wrong way
round? we should be keeping contextual information *now*, and then
perhaps thinking about moving it to ARs when this info can be moved to
tags?
secondly, i'm not sure tagger script is going to help, as surely that
will allow you to assign rules like "append version info to track
names" which is not the same as "keep version info same as tracklist",
as there's version info we store (or will store) that is not on
covers. taggerscript will only help on global preferences - i still
think we'll always need context-based rules for what is and isn't
included on titles.
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
